Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  December 30, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PST

11:00 pm
while we all heard that there was a return notice this year, that is not relevant to the facts of the written finding. the petitioner had not produced any evidence that there was a notice prior to the tax bill in april. so why is the date of return confirmation important? it goes to the plausibility of the argument. we need it look at whether additional notice was ill possible. the bill said it was at that time. so until the petitioner shows that there had been a return notice, it doesn't make sense that argue that the tax collector should have done more to provide notice. there was no opportunity for him to do so. respectfully, i urge you to delay your decision until
11:01 pm
conclusive evidence is provided in order for you to makes an informed decision rather than rush into a decision that would harm the public trust and fair government process of san francisco. thank you. >> councillor breed: thank you for your comments. there seems to be no other members of the public. >> clerk: please step up, sir. >> i'd like to have a moment of silence for mayor lee. i was shocked to hear that he passed away. i personally loved mayor lee, his wife, anita, and his two daughters. the last time i talked to mayor lee, it was not a very nice conversation. but i'd like to have a moment of
11:02 pm
silence for mayor lee, and for that little 8-year-old boy, gabriel, who has murdered by his father because he thought he was gay. so, moment of silence, please. >> thank you. miss canada, and i have a picture, if you can show it on the overboard, please,
11:03 pm
100-year-old woman lived right across the street from ms. breed. in my opinion, was taken with a noose from her house and she died. but after she died, she was left in a cold freezer for one month because the family couldn't afford to get her out of storage to bury her. that's the legacy of lee and breed. no way. >> clerk: thank you for your public comment. madam president? next speaker, please. >> um, i guess my condolences to the family for ed lee's passing. i guess we're talking about homelessness again and i have to
11:04 pm
go back to, who is monitoring in the city and county of san francisco the standards of care? i -- i would like some type of answer from city officials. right now, i'm under the impression it's nobody. they don't monitor standards of care. my other problem is, there's been declared a state of emergency regarding homelessness. when you have a state of emergency, it's more intense. i would like to believe that we can get reports as to what jeff kazinski is doing. is he providing more housing or is he living off the coat tails of what was done?
11:05 pm
i would appreciate if you would start asking some questions. i'm wondering about -- i guess i'm just very, very traumatized because i'm a victim of how the shelters abuse people and get a free pass. the committee doesn't have the tools to properly monitor the shelters. i mean, if a crime happens in a shelter and the shelter monitoring gets it, all they can do is issue a report. they don't have -- they can't interview staff. they can't get video. i mean, they're under the whim of -- >> clerk: thank you, sir, for your questions. madam president? >> councillor breed: any other members of the public that would like to provide public comment? seeing none, public comment is
11:06 pm
now closed. madam clerk, let's go to the closed session, please. >> clerk: item 38, approved on october 21, 2017, continued from december 5, 2017. authorizing the board of supervisors to convene in closed session today, december 12, at 3:00 p.m. with the department of human resources regarding the labor negotiate augustses of the open labor contracts. >> councillor peskin: in light of the mayor's passing, i would like to continue this item to our meeting of january 9. >> councillor breed: supervisor peskin has made a motion. seconded. can we take the continuance without objection? it passes unanimously. madam clerk, let's go to those
11:07 pm
items for adoption without reference to committee. >> clerk: items 63 to 66 considered for adoption. roll call vote on items. if a supervisor does not agree, an item can be severed, considered separately. >> councillor breed: roll call vote. >> councillor farrell: aye. >> councillor kim: aye. >> councillor peskin: aye. >> councillor ronen: aye. >> councillor safai: aye. >> councillor sheehy: aye. >> councillor yee: aye. >> councillor breed: aye. >> councillor cohen: aye. >> clerk: nine ayes. >> councillor breed: those items
11:08 pm
adopted unanimously. >> clerk: on behalf of supervisor tang, for the late mr. michael r. barton, david a. wong, dana denise faulkner, mr. j.b. rumbug, and mr. james semiera. on behalf of supervisor yee and in addition to supervisor tang and mr. della cruz, and for donna lindh murphy and motion made on behalf of the entire board of supervisors for the 43rd mayor of san francisco, honorable mayor edwin lee. >> councillor breed: thank you, colleagues this brings us to the end of our agenda. madam clerk, any further business before us today?
11:09 pm
>> clerk: that concludes our business. >> councillor breed: colleagues, we're adjourned. happy holidays. and we'll see you next year.
11:10 pm
>> thank you, good afternoon, everyone, this meeting will come to order, welcome to the december 11th, 2017 special meeting of the rules committee. my name is supervisor chair of the committee and to my left is rule committee members norman ye e our clerk today is john carole. and i'd like to thank jesse larson and nona mallconian for staff north meeting. do you have any announcements. >> silence cellphones and electronic devices and copys of
11:11 pm
documented should be submitted to the clerk and items acted upon will appear on the january 92,018th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you mr. clerk. please call item number 1. >> an ordinance with the code to establish the tenant assistance fund for hazardous housing and to allow eligible tenants to vacate issued bit department of building inspection or fire department to receive financial assistance for the fund for up to two years. >> great. unless there's -- i'm just going to make a few opening comments and call up members from the mayor's office and department of building inspection, fire department and our human services agency and city attorney's office all who have worked on this fund. back in the beginning part of this year as many of you know but this is also just for the general public's knowledge we discovered a hazardous situation
11:12 pm
and we had 30 individuals leave in dungeon-like conditions. they were in an old converted garage with no windows and no light and one way in and one way out exposing electrical wires and pluming and essentially little coupe cal -- cubicals built underground that were very small, tiny living spaces for almost 30 individuals and the reason this was brought tour. >> toni-marie: our attention we got a call from a tenant that said they were in dispute with the master tenant and many of you know a master tenant would be in one person's name with many people under one person and the master tenant dispute resulted in pg and e being shut off and there was an individual with breatheing support or ventilateer support that could not get it along with all the other tenants that needed
11:13 pm
electricity and it was a master tenant situation and we were extremely perplexed by the call for that particular address because we couldn't imagine where anyone would be living and building inspections along with the fire marshal were called and went out immediately inspected the space and discovered what i described in the beginning of the remarks and individuals living in dungeon-like conditions. for the first time in our city's history there was an order to vacate by the fire department but with that vacation, the city attorney's office was able to negotiate a relocation money two month's rent and utilities for the tenants that were documented at that space over $4,000 per tenant and then working with the city attorney's office and h.s. a. and my staff and ben ames
11:14 pm
along with the department of homelessness and the support of housing we were able to negotiate some space in the existing building upstairs while an unauthorized church vacated individuals stayed there for a short amount of time and we got these individuals in to salvation army, light house, for a few months temporary temporarily again h.s.a. stepped up to support those tenants and in the meantime we had this conversation that there was a warehouse working group that was then evolved in to this hazardous housing working group and that is what is before us today and we've create aid new piece of legislation and we have a new program that will essentially treat individuals that are living? these conditions that are essentially asked to move or evicted at no fault of their own
11:15 pm
very similar to a fire and so we looked at the fire victims assistance program and essentially made a sub section under that program that would be dealing with individuals living in a hazardous housing situation and so this is designed to be transitional subsidy for those individuals six months primarily at discretion of the director of h.s.a. to extend more no more than two years to find more permanent housing so we again appreciate my colleagues sitting in a special rules committee meeting, we want to have this sent to the full board of the committee report because we want to take the first vote before the holidays and also to finalize this program when we return from our wintery sets so that we can begin to set this up and some of the things i'd like folks presenting today to think about is i know we did some
11:16 pm
initial thinking about how this money would be utilized and how much people might be able to avail themselves for this program but we might think about properly funding this if there's going to be more individuals identified as well as based on the discovery of more individual s living in substandard housing that might be asked to leave and the difficulty with this versus our fire victims' assistance fund is in a situation of a fire, very often tenants have a place to move back to when the work is completed or they're giving that option in this situation, it's not as clear cut in terms of the ability to move back for five mesh a there was no option there was no way to make that livable space, if it were a above ground there's windows and air and light and maybe the upgrades could be made to make the housing more permanent and again
11:17 pm
that's why we put the discretion at the director and working with h.s.a. and supportive housing to make that final determination but in the situation of five persia there's not the option of making that permanent livable space so those are some of the things we're going to think about today. so for -- unless you would like to make an initial comments i'll call up jeff buckly from the mayor's office who worked with our office hand and hand on createing this program. >> interview: thank you, i appreciate the opportunity to speak and so the legislation that you have before you as you mentioned i think the goal is to help relocate tenants who are displaced from their homes bit administrative orders to vacate by d.b.i. or the fire department and this was created as a result of the five persia case just to kind of crystalize what supervisor said earlier, it was very clear from those of us who
11:18 pm
responded to the five persia situation we were dealing with a gap in the way that the city would respond to residents who are faced and living in this type of situation and we lacked the resources in really the system support to be able to work with those residents and find them habit able, suitable housing in particular i want to point out the heroic work of your staff because she jumped in to that situation and on the ground and really helped make what could have been a much more chaotic situation far more manageable but the reality was is that we needed to have a much better response network in spaces like this when and if they consider the city has the ability to step in there and have a more manageable process and i think a big driver of that concern for having this more managed process was the concern we would have people either
11:19 pm
evaporate in to a difficult housing market or find themselves homeless or on the street as a result of having, not having the necessary response. so a couple things that went in to it when we were looking at the legislation was, what i think is somewhat different than the city's fire response is in these situations what appears to be the clear culpability of the property owners and so what i think this legislation besides deploying the funds necessary to help rapidly rehouse people in safe living conditions, it also allows and puts on the hook the property owners who the city you know, knowingly contends have rented to people in substandard living conditions and so it has two effects. it both deemploys a resources and deals with the situations where the property owner mayor the master tenant may be
11:20 pm
culpable in the living conditions of this situation so i feel like it handles both of those situations. you have before you many of the different departments that responded who can provide you the information you may request and we enjoyed the partnership of working with you on this issue and i think we've seen it deployed in a situation since then to largely successful resulting but i think it's also safe to say that this is a learning process and i think the city has to get better at its response in each instance so thank you again supervisor. >> thank you mr. buckly yeah a couple points that you added on we will have an annual report and we'll be submitted by h.s.a. to the board of supervisor and the mayor on the use and the he have ka see of this program as well as one of the things that we wrote in to the legislation was the ability to have if
11:21 pm
landlords were culpable and some of the money from the lawsuits would then go in to help fund this program so that would also be an additional stream of money to help fund this program and next individual i'd like to call up is ms. olivia scanland from the fire department to say a few words. good afternoon, thank you very much. olivia scanlan government liaison for the fire department. so, we worked collaboratively with your office and we enjoyed it very much to try and, as jeff buckly articulateed come together as a city to be the safety net for these individuals and this began for the fire department and i'll have the fire marshal chief speak to this , pretty much after what happened in oakland we got more
11:22 pm
calls and complaints for our fire members to look at these properties and see what people were living in and they were living in hazardous and dangerous conditions. the fire marshal will speak to 5 smear but we look forward to making this legislation, it will really help these people and in times of need when they need a safety net and they need the city to step up and be there so thank you very much and i'll have the fire marshal speak. >> thank you very much for your office's assistance, you were very helpful along with the fire marshal helping to respond in an aggressive manner. >> thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors fire marshal so just briefly on 5 persia, it was an illegal change of use to a residential
11:23 pm
use which was the facility was designed for storage in the basement there and it was changed to a more hazardous use meaning people were living and sleeping there. it was changed to a more hazardous use, it didn't have exits and it didn't have rescue windows and so the fire marshal position when we had to make a determination of imminent hazard as it relates to enforcing the fire code is if there's an illegal change abuse to a more hazardous use to a residential in this case and there's exiting and rescue windows it rises to that level of imminent danger and we issue an order to vacate as we did on persia. just a little background, we've had up to state 50 complaints on illegal use of which we've given five orders to vacate meaning 10 % of those rose to the level where it was changeed use to residential and it didn't have
11:24 pm
adequate existing. >> that is this year? >> a little over a year. >> including 5 persia? >> correct. >> do you know how many individuals that is? how many individuals were effected by those orders? >> well, i don't have it committed to memory the last one it's about 30 as well and we had one that was only three or four people but yeah, the most has been persia and it's the most recent one about 30. >> where is the one that was also 30 people. >> on 24th street. >> oh, ok. if you have any questions? >> just first of all i want to clarify one point that i made in the beginning that it was you the fire marshal and your agency that required for the first time in the city's history that the landlord would have to pay those relocation money to the individual tenants so that was
11:25 pm
really helpful in this situation over $4,000 per individual that was living in these situations and the order basically said that in many ways it was about taking advantage of those individuals and putting them in harm's way so that was something that had not been done and it was an order that your department let on. my second not a statement but this is more the question, in those five that rows to the level of hazardous, were there any that seemed as though in your opinion that could be modified to be more habit able or safely habit able? >> not without extension i have work, no. >> obviously five persia no but some off the once were they above ground? >> they were above ground but without going in to too much detail some needed extensive work for change of use and it would have taken some time and you couldn't get accomplished in the year we're talking
11:26 pm
significant amount of work to make the building safe and not only that, planning and zoning, et cetera, there are so many hurdles to clear to get there. >> any questions on that? >> i'll wait for all the speakers. >> ok. >> so thank you. next person is william straw from the department of building inspections. if you wanted to say or rosemary busk. thank you also for the wonderful work your office did on behalf of these tenants and this situation and helping us shape this legislation. >> thank you supervisor. i definitely want to thank and you the mayor's office for sponsoring this legislation and you gave a wonderful description of what we'll do but i want to touch on addition at points and one of the first things we'll do is help the fire department and
11:27 pm
the department of building inspection when we're phased with hazards whether individuals occupying a space to help get their cooperation in vacating that space because of the i am inant hazards so that no one is injured because there will be tools to help them relocate very quickly and so the propertyen is gone after as far as the maintenance to the building but the consequences to the occupants of the building that is where we had the gap and this will also help us with our enforcement out reach program so when those individuals are in these spaces talking to the individuals it will be much more helpful to explain to them in several different languages if they need that and what their legislation can provide. the third item is the fact if the property owner then does not reimburse the city at the time
11:28 pm
that they had been told expenditures have been disbursed to make repairs and or to assist occupants and that is increasing whether or not the property owner has responded the first, second or third time to applied applaud that because the un intended consequences is this will then throw a much stronger message to the property owners who are currently as we speak, allowing people to live in these types of conditions, how expensive this is going to be for them, not necessarily as far as the code violation but for the safety the individuals and to house them while this work is continuing to try and legalize the space so thank you very much for that. >> thank you.
11:29 pm
and then i'd like to call up now ben ames from human services agency and we worked to craft this in a manner use able and sustainable for the city so thank you for all your hard work ? >> thank you supervisors. so i'm going to talk about the human services aspect of the program so when we came on board with the persia street tenants we were down to five tenants that needed housing and we're able to space them in to an s.r. o. and the next project i got called in to was the 24th street project and it looks to me right now my numbers are a
11:30 pm
little rough mind you that recently we had three two alarm fires in two days and i've had to operate a shelter and get a bunch of people in to housing and my research is shaky but for 24th street right now fort tenants that came forward to accept our offer of house we have 16 rooms in an s.r.o. housing 21 people. >> is that on 24th street? >> now when going through that tenant population and looking at who was there and trying to convince people to come in to housing because the population was mono lingual, spanish speaking undocumented day labor ors except for one family we found and that was a 17 -year-old girl in her 17 -year-old boyfriend living with his father and she was pregnant and so i needed to split and consider that group of people as a family split them off in put them in to different housing but everybody else was fine going in to a resident occupancy hotel so in the future i'm not always going to place
11:31 pm
everybody in to an s.r.o. there are times it's more appropriate that we put folks in to more traditional apartments but using the fire program system we have in place we can do that relatively quickly so right now we're going to absorb the cost and we're happy to do so this year but in the future years we're going to need to increase our budget for h.s.a. and purchase street for the five tenants for one year it's costing h.s.a. $82,800 in rent and these folks were paying about $300 a month in the market rate i'm getting for an s.r.o. is $1400 so it's quite a gap for me to bridge. >> just a point of clarification i didn't go in to that but this is a good point to make that so the way the program is designed
11:32 pm
is that you go out and do a determination find what the tenants were paying in this instance it was between $300 and $500 a month and this program and subsidize the difference between what they were paying and the rent so the difference of 500 to $1400 around numbers is $900 for one tenant spread out over a year might be more than that if it's only $300 then you are getting in to over $1,000 and multiplied by multiple tenants and i believe it was eight for five and there's eight. >> we widdled it down to five. >> a couple people from 5 persia found their own housing and moved out and i thought it was encouraging. >> please proceed. >> so for the 24th street project we have 16 rooms with 21 people and for six months --
11:33 pm
>> hold on. excuse me. you guys can whispering is echo ing and i'm having a hard time focusing. >> for six months for that project 207 # thousand -- the family with the pregnant young woman that is going to cost us $9,972 for the year. i decided that everybody else was going to be doing six months but because of her due date would have been right at six months and we don't want to suddenly have a young family facing homelessness that i bumped that up to a year. >> to one year. >> and so originally just for clarification, originally we were absorbing this program as it's taken time for us to pass legislation and it's done in january and it's a sub section of the fire victim's assistance, how much money is allocated for
11:34 pm
that program. >> about $300,000. >> so it sounds like just with these two instances we're up to half of the program. >> correct. >> we're work with your office to allocate and advocate for more money based on just on these two examples alone it sounds like the need is going to increase potentially. >> great. >> i'm suzie smith i'm deputy director for policy and planning at human app services agency we're estimating about $225,000 per year for this program moving forward and it's hard to know exactly we didn't predict how much occupants will be there and how many illegal units will be there and that covers ten households within 90 day stay in hotel stays plus five households for six months of rent and move in expenses so that's our best guess based on the previous data around orders to vacate in the
11:35 pm
past. >> ok, great. >> yes, sir. >> so the estimates that you are giving us is for six months or for the year. >> the 225 would be for the fiscal year. >> i'm up for, what i'm working on now we're doing for six months so the 24th street project is that budget is for six months and we just did six month extension. >> it could double. >> pardon. >> it could conceivably double the amount if it's extended to one year. >> correct. >> so if these two examples, you are 220 -- 250. >> 225 is gone. >> we are authorized at six months intervals and we're thankful that the allocation is up to the h.s.a. district or discretion because it's a case
11:36 pm
by case to see whether it makes sense to continue to sustain but the cost would continue to grow if there's not another housing option it's a decision point to say what is the best use of this point. >> so i guess my question is really about the budget and if you find a situation where there's 30 people then you wouldn't have enough basically. >> so far we have been able to since we were a large agency, if we've gotten specific directions from the board to make it work financially in the current year we have done that and it comes to add backs and sometimes it comes moving forward now that we have two rental assistance programs for people that by result of a fire or vacate order
11:37 pm
and. >> well, what happened is this was, this came after the initial conversation for the budget year but what we did is we said this would be referencing the initial fire victim's fund for the first year and going forward that is why we're coming to the conversation. >> it didn't go in to the budget committee. >> not yet. >> my question is about the budget and i have no issues with the concept and i'm thinking what does this mean and right now we're 25 doesn't sound like that large of an amount but i can see situation where i don't know how many of these situations we're going to uncover but certainly when i was helping my daughter look for a house by three years ago i saw
11:38 pm
places why they had 20 people living here so if you run in to a situation like these where houses where there's 30 people and how are we going to handle that? >> i think two things to note, one there is an income eligibility thresh held for the program so it is 100% of area meeting income and that will screen out some and as for the 24th street situation in many cases this is really last resort so if they have another option can move in with someone else and have potential to pay on their own and they do that and they come to us as a last resort and finally we base the projection on the previous numbers orders to vacate from fire and d.b.i. to be able to have a reasonable guess tament
11:39 pm
moving forward. >> i'm also hearing from the fire department that what happened in oakland since then they've received an increased number of complaints i guess, i don't know if that's going to have a, if that's a factor going forward. >> yeah and i guess five of those resulted of the 50 resulted in an actual, i think five of the 50 as was reported by the fire department resulted in an order to vacate. >> could i ask the fire department chief, i mean fire marshal, how many let's say in previous years you have 50 complaints and that resulted in five but what was it before? >> >> other i've been the fire marshal so i can speak to my time as fire marshal and the previous year, i believe we only had one or two and we went from one or two to close to 50 after the ghost hip so there was a
11:40 pm
great ear wareness and not only from the public burr from our own members responding to medical calls et cetera and they were reporting back what they were finding. >> it's a good thing. i mean, as you get these complaints. it's a good thing that you actually get. >> absolutely we welcome the complaints and we. >> so i'm still a little concerned whether 225 is really enough for this program. >> i'm sorry, repeat the question. >> i'm just concerned. >> yeah i mean obviously if the board choses to limit eligibility criteria and more significantly to narrow who would get access to the program. >> maybe we need to double check the numbers and it could be an ask for more money than 225. >> it's worth, i mean, it's ask for more money and how much more are we going to ask is the question you know and, 225 seems
11:41 pm
low to me but you might be absolutely correct it could be that it is double or five times or ten times more than the question becomes if it's going to be that much how much can we the city support the program up to what point i guess that's my concern and that's coming from budget point of view. >> yeah. >> the second thing that would be if the landlord provides a lease to somebody, and that somebody becomes the master leaseer. >> master lease or yeah, starts subleaseing and the owner knows if ten other people are living there illegally i guess that is more of a legal question, hen who is responsible to reimburse
11:42 pm
the city. >> so under the legislation, the city attorney's office would seek the fees essentially to recover the costs through litigation. >> from who? >> from the landlord, the master landlord. >> oh, ok, so not the person they lease it to who happened illegally lease it to a bunch of other people? >> no, it would be the owner of the building because they're technically responsible for maintaining the conditions. >> city council given -- can you shine this light on this? >> sure. deposit thue john gibner, it may depend on the circumstances, or the dinance gives broad authority to seek reimbursement from any person who created caused committed or maintained the condition which i assume in most cases is the owner or master tenant but the ordinance
11:43 pm
gives a broader authority. >> ok, so you could go after that master tenant? >> if that person cause order maintained the nuisance condition yeah. if they're pocketing the money does the landlord have to pay so i want to make sure there's that flexibility. thank you for classification. so, i am a little concerned about whether this going to be sort of an unfunded type of thing where there's no limitation to how much we will put out.
11:44 pm
has there been any discussion around that issue? >> before you do that, one of the things we did over the past year in conversations with drafting this legislation, we put in strong discretion in human agencies director to video these under guidelines and flexibility on a case by case basis so what we were hoping for in this year was to deal with the 5 persia and any other instances that might come up but then as we move towards passing this legislation, we would try to come up with a projected amount that might serve this number and take it as we move forward in the future to see if there's a dramatic increase in needs baits on some of the conversation besides bringing housing up to habit able levels but i'm happy also that the agencies answer that but i
11:45 pm
wanted you to know some of the things we had as we were part of a working group that was multi agency in its nature the department building inspection h.s.a., fire, mayor's office of housing and department of homelessness and supportive city attorney's office and we modeled it based on some of the situations that were very similar with the fire victims assistance fund and you can never predict how many fires there's going to be and some years there could be ten, 15 fires and you might go over amount and the agency is funded well enough that it can draw another source but we're trying to project based on this year what might go on during the budget conversations but we'll continue 245 conversation -- that conversation and adjust as we go forward. >> i am a little uncomfortable that there's no cap to what we're talking about i'm cam fort able there's a pilot testing
11:46 pm
program we're doing and this program that we're setting up for initial stages will be capped at 300,000 or something whatever amount but at some appointive to worry about whether or not we're going to discover a lot of places and what we did then because basically we're set ago side no boundaries. >> right now it's not fund sod we have to go through the budget conversation this is essentially the fire victim's assistance fund that is a sub section of that and we have not had the conversations about funding and we will do that in the upcoming year as part of the budget process. >> i read it by didn't see anything that says that when you set it up we're not obligated to fund it. >> the way the language is written it is discretionary so it's not an entitlement per se it's at the discretion of the h.
11:47 pm
s.a. director. >> the attorney is nodding his head. >> it h it comes to budget season we'll come back to you. >> i don't have any other questions. so thank you. thank you for all your hard work both of you. and unless there's any addition additional comments i think we'll go ahead if there's any members of the public that wish to comment on this item we'll open it up for public comment. seeing none. public comment is closed. any additional comments supervisor yee. >> sure. ok. first of all i appreciate the departments that worked on this concept and working with the departments because as i said i'm supportive of the concept and i guess i also sit on that budget committee and it looks to
11:48 pm
see what things cost and since this discretionary in this case and i love the concept and the work you put in to it and also a few very supportive of attendants that get caught up in this evacuation i would like to process with a positive recommendation as community report on december the 12th. >> just add to that and we would be amending the administrative code to establish a tenants assistance fund for hazardous housing for certain eligible step ants displaced to administrative orders to vacate by the building inspection of the fire department to receive final assistance for up to two years. so without object, that item is ordered thank you for your hard work on this matter. any other business for us today? >> no further business. >> thank you very much, motion to adjourn.
11:49 pm
we are adjourned. >> i would like to say good morning, but it's really not a very good morning. welcome to the san francisco county transportation authority
11:50 pm
for today. it seems like it's been a long day already, tuesday december the 12th. i just want to start the meeting by offering our condolences to the family of edwin lee, the 43rd mayor of the city and county of san francisco and share all of our condolences with people of the city and county of san francisco. i want to thank all of my colleagues on the board, many of whom gathered in the wee hours of this morning at zuckerberg general hospital. with that, our clerk is alberto quintanilla and mr. clerk, if you could please call the roll, we're going to have a very brief meeting and then we are going to adjourn to go have a press
11:51 pm
conference with our acting mayor london breed on the mayor's balcony. >> clerk: item one, commissioner breed, breed absent. commissioner cohen, present. commissioner farrell, present. commissioner fewer, fewer absent. commissioner kim, kim present. commissioner peskin. present. commissioner ronen, present. commissioner safai present, commissioner sheehy, absent. commissioner tang, present commissioner yee. >> commissioner sheehy should be named present. commissioner fewer, i spoke to a few hours ago, we'll take that without objection.
11:52 pm
i'm going to forego the chair support, madam secretary director, are there any items you want to share? any comment on the chair's report or executive director's report. public comment is closed on items 2 and 3. could you read the consent agenda. >> clerk: four to nine consent, items being considered for approval. staff is not planning to present on the items. >> is there any public comment on item four, the minutes of the december 5th meeting? seeing none, public comment is closed. would any member or members like an item severed, if not, a roll call on the consent agenda please. motion to move the consent agenda made by commissioner yee,
11:53 pm
seconded by commissioner farrell and on that item, a roll call please. >> clerk: commissioner farrell. aye. commissioner cohen, aye. commissioner ronen, aye. commissioner safai, aye. commissioner sheehy, aye. commissioner tang, aye. commissioner yee, aye. >> could you please read the next item? which seemed very important a week ago. programming of 6.189 and 4.1 for
11:54 pm
the prop k. >> good morning commissioners, policy and programming director. last week, at the december 5th board meeting the motion to approve the item did not pass after considerable discussion at the board. the commission generally agrees with the programming of the funds to the street resurfacing but the commissioners couldn't agree on the second part of the recommendation to transfer on the $4 million in prop k funds programmed to street resurfacing to manage lanes environmental phase. the board requested to see more evidence that the managed lanes would improve congestion without negatively impacting freeway corridors or local streets and a more holistic approach to
11:55 pm
congestion and other areas of concern. in light of the robust discussion, we have advised staff recommendation to only approve the proposed programming of the state funds to street resurfacing projects and this is a request to approve on first read to meet the state's timeline of december 15th of when we need to submit the applications to the california transportation commission and we would defer action on the fund exchange to provide more time for staff to complete planning studies and address commissioner's concerns. there's a list of street resurfacing projects funded by the state funds and a map that you can't see particularly well -- yes, you can see it. >> if we were to approve this as revised given the december 15th date, this would be the final
11:56 pm
approval, not the first read, is that correct? >> that's correct. it would be approval on first read. >> is there a motion? made by commissioner farrell, seconded by commissioner tang. colleagues -- are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. and on the item as revised, same house, same call, the item is finally approved. next item, please. >> clerk: item 11, programming 2.813.264 to the san francisco municipal transportation agency non infrastructure project, this is an action item. >> i want to start by briefly thanking colleague commissioner tang and her staff and my staff
11:57 pm
who listened to i think very sophisticated discussion we had here a number of months ago. i want to thank tilley chang and the ta staff and miss lafour but particularly commissioner tang, she did a lot of the heavy lifting. with that, commissioner tang? >> thank you. i echo my thanks to the ta staff and as well amber crab as well. i just encourage our colleagues to look through the packet. there is a revised organization chart where you can see the new structure for the program. so we have decided to move everything to fall under the sfcta because i think it will work more well with the schools
11:58 pm
and needs brought to our attention and so i think all schools will benefit from this change. we have found a way to address this without reducing any of the funding to the nonprofit partner agencies. i think overall the out come was great and i look forward to continuing the discussion another day. >> thank you commissioner tang. i neglected to thank the mta and department of public health and san francisco unified school district for really coming to quite a number of meetings and being willing albeit with a little reluctance at first, to restructure this. and thank you commissioner tang. is there a motion to approve item 11 made by commissioner tang. seconded by commissioner yee. any public comment on that item?
11:59 pm
thank you. thank you to all of the nonprofit participants for your understanding, i know you all got a little nervous at the beginning, but i think you'll see a program that not only allows you and your staff to continue the good work they're doing but will make it a much more efficient program. with that, seeing no public comment. public comment is closed and on the motion, same house, same call, item 11 is approved. mr. logan, would you upset if we continued item 12? all right. is there any public comment on -- would you read item 12 alberto. >> clerk: update on the transportation network company landscape and regulation in california and across the country. >> is there public comment on
12:00 am
item 12? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to move to the first meeting in january. we'll take it without objection. is there introduction of new items? seeing none, any public item on said item. no. is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed and we'll adjourn the meeting in the memory of edwin lee, the 43rd mayor of the city and county of san francisco, we're adjourned. ♪


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on